Huang v. Johnson, 97 N.Y.2d 567 (2002)
Under New York Executive Law § 510-b(7)(b), a juvenile is not entitled to credit against their Office of Children and Family Services (OCFS) placement for time spent in custody on an unrelated charge if that charge culminates in a conviction, adjudication, or adjustment, even if the conviction occurs after the juvenile’s release from OCFS custody.
Summary
Michelle Huang, on behalf of her son Raymond Yu, sued OCFS officials, alleging false imprisonment due to the denial of credit for time Yu spent in jail on an unrelated charge while under OCFS placement. Yu was a juvenile delinquent placed with OCFS. He was later arrested on a murder charge while AWOL from OCFS. The Second Circuit certified the question of whether OCFS properly refused to credit Yu for the 83 days served on the unrelated charge because the conviction occurred after his release from OCFS custody. The New York Court of Appeals held that OCFS acted properly because the statute requires that the unrelated charge *not* culminate in a conviction for the juvenile to receive credit.
Facts
Raymond Yu was adjudicated a juvenile delinquent and placed with the State Division for Youth (later OCFS). He was transferred to a less restrictive evening reporting program but went AWOL. During his unauthorized absence, he was arrested on unrelated charges of murder and gang assault and held at Rikers Island. Upon release from Rikers, he was returned to OCFS custody, and his release date was extended to account for both the initial AWOL period and the time spent at Rikers. Yu later pleaded guilty to attempted murder.
Procedural History
Huang sued OCFS officials in federal court, alleging civil rights violations and false imprisonment. The District Court granted summary judgment to the defendants. The Second Circuit reversed in part, rejecting the District Court’s Eleventh Amendment ruling, but certified to the New York Court of Appeals the question of whether Yu should have received credit for time served at Rikers Island, considering his later conviction.
Issue(s)
Whether OCFS properly refused to credit Yu, under New York Executive Law § 510-b(7)(b), for the 83 days served at Rikers Island on an unrelated charge that did not culminate in a conviction until after Yu’s release from OCFS custody.
Holding
Yes, because Executive Law § 510-b(7)(b) provides credit only if the custody arose from a charge that did not culminate in a conviction, adjudication, or adjustment.
Court’s Reasoning
The court reasoned that the statute’s plain language requires that the unrelated charge not result in a conviction for the juvenile to receive credit for time served. The statute states that credit is given, “provided… [t]hat such custody arose from an arrest… on another charge which did not culminate in a conviction, adjudication or adjustment.” The court interpreted this language to mean that the absence of a conviction is a condition precedent to receiving credit. The court emphasized that “a statutory grant to which a proviso is annexed should be read as if no power was given other than that contained within the bounds of the proviso.” The legislative history supports this interpretation. A memorandum from the Attorney General indicated the intent of the amendment was to clarify that an escaped youth detained on subsequent charges could receive credit “[o]nly if… exonerated of the subsequent charges.” Since Yu was ultimately convicted of attempted murder, he was not entitled to credit for the time served awaiting trial on that charge.